We are attorneys representing victories of the heart, and if the victories. The Board of Directors of victories has recited receive court your correspondence dated the 15th and 17th 2011, and we respond as follows. The letter state that you intend to publish information about victories and or its programs. Actual publication has already occurred through the posting of such information on your Internet blog. A preliminary review of your statements raises the following serious legal considerations and consequences.

My response:

I gave the recipients of the emails and letters sufficient time to be in touch with me to arrange some type of mediation, something I had sought for a few years. When I didnâ€™t hear back from them, I published the document, as I had warned. I can only speculate they met together and determined the best course of action was to do nothing believing I would not follow through. When I did publish, their strategy was to accuse me of lying, distorting, as their lawyer letter stated. Behind the scenes, I would also guess they claimed I was having an emotional breakdown. The content and styleÂ of the lawyerâ€™s Â letter was very similar to language I had heard from Kurt. Also, the mention of David Karr is something few people would know, besides Kurt, so I know he had to be the source of the letter. Â I spoke to Kurt shortly after this and met him just prior to his death. I thought it was doubly cruel for Victories principals to use Kurtâ€™s power and relationship with me to prevent me from exercising my First Amendment right and holding them accountable. It was tragic to meet with him, understand he was so sick, yet manipulated to fight me, someone he thought of as a brother.Â

First, please be reminded that in the written leadership agreement between you and victories, you agreed not to lecture publish anything concerning victories or its programs without the prior written authorization of the victories board or its designee. Such permission was never granted to you by victories. There are hereby directed to immediately remove all such items from your blog and take all action necessary to bring yourself into compliance with your contract. Failure to do so will result in further legal action against you.

My response:Â

The contract mentioned here was something that Kurt thought of after I began to make my complaints with leaders and threats to write about them more public. KurtÂ described the contract as something to protect Victories programs and I had no intention, nor have I over the years, attempted to copy any of Victories programs. I suspected after receiving this threatening lawyer letter that it was Kurtâ€™s way of trying to prevent me from making my unresolved complaints public. I had made every attempt to resolve these complaints privately.

I warned the principals I would write about these matters as I considered them abusive to me and an example of the systemic entitlement these men had within the organization. I knew they could do whatever they wanted,Â expect not to be held accountable, and further, key powerful people within the system, like Kurt, would be manipulated to fight others like myself who were more vulnerable.

My only recourse was to write and publish. I have to assume they underestimated my ability to write and the many contemporaneous documents I wrote about what was happening around me and to me at the time.

Anyone knowing how the dyadic leadership structure worked may also realize how personally damaging it was to Kurt to manipulate him to clean up their messes. When I met with Kurt shortly before his death, he told me how difficult this period was for him. He and I had been a leader team. He knew I asked him to recuse himself from this conflict, but Buddy Portugal pressured him to get me to back off and withdraw my request for mediation. No one would be surprised by this and itâ€™s likely one or all of the surviving leader principals may be able to substantiate this as witnesses.Â Also, the letters I received were quite obviously written by Kurt.Â

Second, your disclosure of the statements that you attribute to (leader nameÂ and/or leader name) in the context of the 1995 name weekend violates the confidentiality agreement applicable to all leaders and participants will weekend. Moreover, your statements concerning these individuals misquotes them and assert claims about them which are untrue and distorted.

My response: This point involves my disclosure I was told by two leaders we were going to â€œsmoke pot and kill a pet, white rat from an Evanston pet storeâ€ at this Thursday night pre-weekend meeting. Allegedly, I talked them out of it. I only really know I didnâ€™t smoke pot or kill a pet rat that night. So, everything I detailed in my letter was completely true and involved inappropriate behavior by leaders thatÂ could have riskedÂ the safety of participants and placed these leaders and myself and the Victories organization in serious legal and ethical jeapordy.

As I mentioned in my disclosure, I revealed this inappropriate behavior to my wife, a close friend and later Kurt. So, Kurt being manipulated to deny this actually happened was a tragic manipulation of him by others who he may have felt he had to protect. Kurt knew it happened and perhaps he felt it was so perverse it was essential to deny the truth and discredit and defame me in the process. What was said between these men and Kurt? I donâ€™t know.Â

My conversation with Kurt shortly before he died revealed to me his own distress and dissatisfactions with the events and the pressure placed on him by Portugal.Â IÂ only know Kurt was dying at the time and it was painful for him to meet with me to discuss these things, knowing in fact I was truthful, including the spontaneous anti-semitism and the accusation I was using the â€œrat and potâ€ incident to Â â€œextortâ€ two leaders to get them to support me against Portugal.

Third, your discussion of the nudity on the shadow weekend without disclosing that nudity ceased in 2008 a fact known to you for years appears to be an effort to defame victories. The same can be said of your attempt to equate or compare the actions of the victories board of directors to the egregious conduct of certain religious and academic institutions.

My response:Â It was not a known fact that nudity ceased in 2008. I only knew the idea of men being nude for long periods of time at the weekend was being challenged. During my last formal meeting about this, I was told the plan was to have the men wear black gym shorts. There was no mention about how they would change into the gym shorts and whether there might be t-shirts as well. I still do not know that. The official website makes the pejorative statement that there is no nudity on the weekend in response to the question, â€œI heard there is nudity on this weekend.â€

I believe the use of nudity by the leaders along with other inappropriate program ideas has been very detrimental to the organizational development process and it was part of my comprehensive criticism of programs during my 4+ years in leadership from 2003-2008. It was a dumb idea to copy something from another weekend and it only created doubt and ambivalence about the Victoriesâ€™ program. I and others heard the complaints from participants of the weekend and it was numbing and frightening to me to hear about the length of time men were nude and silent. I considered these methods to be unethical and counterproductive to the welfare of participants and the mission/values of the organization.

Â Further, there is a reason why this program has weak internal and external support within the larger community. If it was such a good experience, why does it still struggle to gain participants. I have no doubt if the principals listened to my complaints and responded, their programs (wisdom years and shadow weekend) would have been improved. Unless there is legal action, I do not plan to publish my evaluation for the Wisdom years experience in Boston where I was a participant. I was asked 2x for my evaluation. The second time it was received, it resulted in 30 minutes of hostile, ad hominem voicemails. Itâ€™s troubling whenÂ you are asked for an evaluation then personally attacked as being â€œchronically disappointed.â€Â

Fourth, your correspondence request appropriate credit for your contributions to the victories, basic staff training handout and defames victories by suggesting that victories has engaged in on ethical or legal misconduct by not acknowledging your contribution and subsequent versions of the handout. In April 2008. You acknowledge that victories have the right to use and publish those materials. The request for attribution was made at the time. It is our understanding the subsequent versions of the document, including those used while you were still waiting basic staff training, do not attribute authorship to any individual, just as your initial version of the document failed to acknowledge the contributions of David Karrâ€™s work form the basis of your draft. Victories has never misrepresented a role in creating the handout. In fact, the message announcing the resignation from victories. Specifically, thank you for this contribution to one of victories programs.

My response:

Readers may find this surprising, but I felt like I put aside a lot of sharp elbows and myopic thinking while involved and even after I resigned. I thought my resignation made it clear I no longer thought I could have an impact and the rigidity of the system almost guaranteed the organization would continue to struggle with development.

On a practical level, it meant Portugal and Mark would have enormous power within the system to stop and divert much of the agreed upon changes in the 2004 Strategic plan. In my opinion expressed verbally and in writing in my ongoing complaints was the fact the 8 person leadership team of which I was a part was destroyed in a unilateral move by Portugal and Mark to leave the team and expand the Wisdom years program.

I remember this meeting vividly when they reported there plan to recruit and develop new leaders for the Wisdom years, but stressed they would bring these new leaders back to our leader team of 8 men (ostensibly) for approval. This never happened and in fact their efforts were so mismanaged and conflict laden, there was some effort on their part to actually secede from the larger Victories organization.

This was a hush-hush situation too and I still donâ€™t know all the facts. I only know the idea of the Wisdom years becoming a separate, free-standing organization was being considered. This essentially bifurcated the organization destroying any momentum for change and development. Others may disagree with my assessment, but to date, I have not read any other perspective. If there is a lawsuit, we will find out.

Nonetheless, the practical results were a lot of dissatisfaction and unresolved conflict. I complained and resigned and other stakeholders were not happy either.

The more practical issue was the two original leader teams continued in their passive-agressive hostility and competition further hampering any substantial development. The mythic idea two men as leaders and recruiters for weekends continued and I can only assume scheduled weekends are cancelled and others struggling to gain participants.

And all efforts would be made to keep the two founders and the other principal leader team happy.Â

Ironically,Â Â it was not until Kurt and another leader team were selected to give a presentation on psychodrama at a mind-body conference where I realized how insensitive these men could be. Kurt and I and several other volunteers were the ones who designed the psychodrama training (the original basic staff training) and enabled volunteers to learn how to do â€œheartworkâ€ or psychodrama during Breakthrough weekends. The fact I was not included in the workshop I found shocking and unacceptable. I lodged a complaint about this too and it went nowhere.

At this later time I requested acknowledgement for my involvement in the overall creative process of the psychodrama training. I wasnâ€™t looking for credit for the writeup or any document used in the training. IÂ believe I should have been given more permanent credit for the total process of evaluating and ending the Spirit of Generosity, then working with the team of others, principally Kurt, to develop what is now the Psychodrama training.

My request for acknowledgement must have sent a shock wave through the leadership of the organization, as the dysfunctional culture of the organization only allowed â€œBob and Buddyâ€ to be credited for anything. There were others recognized at dinners, but they were usually outside persons or groups who were thought to reflect well on the founders, like Wendy Kopald and her womenâ€™s program, which Portugal helped her create.

While anyone involved in the development process would agree I had an important role,Â I was not surprised my request went nowhere, though I was a little surprised it was part of a lawyerâ€™s letter threatening to sue me. So, out of site out of mind.

Your public statements are intentional and malicious acts calculated to inflict substantial harm upon the victories organization. Such conduct can form the basis for an award of compensatory and exemplary damages and would appear to violate the ethical standards of your profession. Moreover, the psychological injury you now allegedly finds a personally distressing is largely attributed to events, which occurred over 15 years ago. In that time you voluntarily chose to join victories as a senior leader, appeared with pocket shortest, Kevin Fitzpatrick, and other leaders of publicly distributed promotional DVD, referred a number of your psychotherapy clients to victories programs, helped recruit and train 60 L, and otherwise promoted an organization you now attack.

My response:

I worked hard to make the organization successful. The public statements I make are to defend my own integrity, hold others accountable, and provide a history of the organizational dynamics to help explain why weekends do not often get the needed participants and the dyadic leader teams who fail, drift off into the sunset. My alternative efforts were to have leadership teams, not two men trying unrealistically to love each other as much as the two original teams.

Ones true understanding of themselves is a retrospective processâ€¦a looking back. It was not until 2011 that I was diagnosed with brain damage from trauma and I began to piece together enough information to better understand the dysfunctional system and people I had been associated with from 1990 and especially from 2003 to 2008. As the more outspoken member of the disenfranchised group, I receive information from others who have helped me create a more cohesive narrative of my experience.

Also, 15 years is not a long time for someone to realize they were blocking and diminishing the impact of some type of abuse. I think Victories would find it impossible to find any expert witness, should they sue me, who would think there was nothing wrong in pressuring me, a volunteer with a history of PTSD and depression who abstained from all drugs and alcohol to smoke pot and participate in the killing of a pet white rat from a pet store the night before an intensive mensâ€™ retreat.

They can claim I was and am lying, but my guess is they know better. Kurt knew I was telling the truth, as I had disclosed this to him several years earlier and I also told my wife and a close friend contemporaneously (see the James Comey method).

So, I do understand they wished I wouldnâ€™t reveal the truth about these events, but then I would betray myself further and all the volunteers who work so hard to make Victories successful, but wonder why it struggles to fill weekends.Â Â Victories has been plagued by organizational silos (the dyadic leader teams) and an inability to create a cohesive and collaborative organization.Â

Victories seems a prompt resolution to this matter of the parties arenâ€™t able to achieve such a resolution, we will commence with a civil suit against you without further notice and if appropriate, file a complaint with the Illinois Department of financial and professional regulation. Please direct all future communications to me.

My response:

OK. I hope they donâ€™t sue, but I will stand up for myself. Like I told them, if anyone even threatens to sue me again, I will immediately take legal action myself to protect my First Amendment rights and personal integrity.

And, as I have told a few of these men, I am still available to mediate these concerns. However, I am no longer willing to share the costs of mediation.Â

A sincere apology can go a long way.

Sincerely,

LawyerÂ name

In publishing this lawyerâ€™s letter and my response, I am fulfilling my promise to the current Victories board to stop being afraid of their threats to sue me. Itâ€™s freeing for me to do so. I am standing up for my constitutional right to free speech and my own personal integrity.

I would add I have been in contact with Paul Kachoris and Kevin Fitzpatrick by phone voice messages inviting them to meet, clear up the distortion and lies about me in a public way. They have not responded to my requests and I will not contact them again. My contact with them preceded my publication of this more overt, naming of principals post, along with the lawyers letter from Victories.

Meyers, J. (2008). A short history of child protection in America. Retrieved from A short history of child protection in America: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/insights_law_society/ChildProtectionHistory.authcheckdam.pdf

WHO. (2002). World Report on Violence and Health: Summary. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/summary_en.pdf